Foreign experience in combating corruption
By orruptsiya - this is the main reason for the decline of the economy and the country's prestige. Many years of experience show that an effective fight against corruption allows the state to solve most of its internal and external problems.
Take Russia as a negative example. Corruption of officials, civil servants, teachers and doctors leads to the decline of all socio-economic spheres. For bribes, officials give permits for deforestation, demolition of architectural monuments, lease of strategically important objects. Law enforcement officers bribed by criminals destroy evidence. The judges acquit the guilty. Teachers provide diplomas to incompetent specialists. Doctors extort bribes for performing planned operations and confirming disability.
Ultimately, the budget receives less than 100-150 trillion rubles a year, the life and health of the citizens of the state is in danger, and foreign investors refuse to invest in the Russian economy. Living standards are falling. Foreign experience in combating corruption can help in this situation, since the anti-corruption measures of the Russian government are inconsistent and ineffective.
Countries with the lowest levels of corruption
The most authoritative institution in the field of corruption assessment in different states is international organization Transparency International. The specialists of this organization each year make a rating of states, arranged in the order from the least corrupt to the most corrupt. At the end of 2019, the results of research by Transparency International showed that the TOP-10 least corrupt states include:
- Denmark, New Zealand, Singapore (first place in the ranking);
It is noteworthy that in each of the listed states, different measures to combat corruption are applied. However, they are all highly effective. Therefore, the idea of using foreign experience can be applied by combining several techniques from different countries.
Singapore Anti-Corruption Practices
The Republic of Singapore is a small island nation with a developed economy. However, it has become so quite recently. 55 years ago, it was a very poor country with a shortage of all vital products and a high level of corruption.
The rise of the economy began precisely with the fight against corruption. Leader of the state Lee Kuan Yew took a number of important measures that allowed solving the problems of the state.
First, work was done to revise and simplify the legislation. The authorities' goal was:
- elimination of complex and ambiguous wording that gives representatives of the executive and judicial authorities grounds for exceeding their powers;
- creation of laws that are simple and understandable to the population that do not contradict each other;
- abolition of procedures requiring permission from government representatives.
The next step was a manifold increase in the remuneration of judges and civil servants with the involvement of highly qualified specialists. Having thus formed a reliable rear of competent judges and officials, the authorities moved on to the most difficult task - the fight against organized crime and the corrupt police.
To combat criminal gangs, tough laws were approved, including the extreme punishment - shooting. As for the police, it had to be replaced almost completely. In 1965, the Singapore police were a clan of Malays covering each other. They were all fired. Chinese were hired to replace them. Naturally, such measures were unpopular among the Malays, who revolted. However, the authorities were resilient and did not accept back into the ranks of the police those who were dismissed due to the loss of confidence.
The final stage in the fight against corruption in Singapore was the creation of an independent commission to investigate the economic crimes of politicians and high-ranking officials. Investigations were carried out even in relation to the relatives of the head of state and his closest associates. As a result, more than half of ministers and high-ranking officials were convicted of corruption. Some of them were criminally liable. Some fled the country forever.
By 1990, corruption in Singapore was defeated. It took 25 years to eradicate the habit of giving and taking bribes from the population. Now the inhabitants of Singapore are distinguished by their emphasized law-abidingness, and the state's economy is dynamically developing every year.
Other examples from foreign practice
Among the states listed above with a low level of corruption, Canada stands out. Transparency International was created precisely at the initiative of the Canadian government. Since 1993, Canada has been actively fighting corruption internationally and domestically.
The turning point that allowed them to go down from the 14th place in the rating to the 6th was the adoption of the Law on Government Responsibility in December 2006. This law made it possible to strictly control the income and expenses of government officials, their contacts with lobbyists, and work on the distribution of budget funds. Also, other legislative acts were adopted, which made it possible to significantly reduce the level of corruption. For example, the law on access to information regulated the payment of monetary rewards to civil servants who reported cases of corruption known to them.
In general, Canada's anti-corruption work is based on four principles:
1. Parliament strictly controls the actions of all officials and reacts to complaints from the population or other civil servants.
2. The government is composed of competent and responsible professionals.
3. All procedures for the distribution of budget funds are carried out openly and transparently.
4. Residents of the state are provided with favorable conditions for life and business.
It should be noted that the Russian government has been trying since 2008 to use methods of fighting corruption from foreign practice. The theses, which are laid down in the anti-corruption program of Canada, were reflected in the National Plan to Combat Corruption, developed at the initiative of the President of Russia. However, at the moment they have not brought the expected result, since the level of corruption in Russia is incomparably higher than in Canada.
Analyzing the anti-corruption policies of other states, it is also worth considering the UN Convention against Corruption of 06/28/2016. This document set out the basic principles of anti-corruption policies of the United States, Japan and South Korea.
The fight against corruption in the United States is based on the independence of the judiciary, a system of control over the work of civil servants, and the transparency of administrative processes. Also, a gradual decrease in the influence of politicians and officials on business plays an important role in the anti-corruption policy of the United States.
Japan uses a tougher anti-corruption mechanism. In this state, politicians are required to report in detail on all income and expenses, including the sources of funding for political parties and election campaigns. These responsibilities are closely monitored by Japanese citizens. Besides, one of the instruments of anti-corruption policy in the country is a high level of wages.
South Korea is one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world. Absolutely all processes in the country are controlled through a single virtual network. This also applies to the activities of civil servants. In fact, the fight against corruption is no longer needed in South Korea. All permits, certificates and other documents are issued via the Internet. Similarly, Koreans receive services from government agencies.
Only the highest echelons of power are subject to corruption in South Korea. For example, four ex-presidents of this state were arrested on charges of accepting bribes and incurred criminal liability.
For anti-corruption policy in Russia to be effective, it is not enough to develop laws according to the listed principles. A real desire of the authorities and the population to fight corruption is needed. Only then will the economy of the state and the standard of living of the population rise.